I have often heard the expression, "God helps those who help themselves," and recently I heard another believer say this is not Biblical. I beg to differ.
Granted, the foregoing expression is not a Bible quote, but, depending on how you interpret that old saying, it is largely true. Just read this passage from Galatians 6 (ESV), which I am so fond of quoting:
"1Brothers, if anyone is caught in any transgression, you who are spiritual should restore him in a spirit of gentleness. Keep watch on yourself, lest you too be tempted. 2Bear one another’s burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ. 3For if anyone thinks he is something, when he is nothing, he deceives himself. 4But let each one test his own work, and then his reason to boast will be in himself alone and not in his neighbor. 5For each will have to bear his own load.
"6One who is taught the word must share all good things with the one who teaches. 7Do not be deceived: God is not mocked, for whatever one sows, that will he also reap. 8For the one who sows to his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption, but the one who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life. 9And let us not grow weary of doing good, for in due season we will reap, if we do not give up. 10So then, as we have opportunity, let us do good to everyone, and especially to those who are of the household of faith."
It is true that Christ called us to share each others' burdens (verse 2), but that does not undo personal responsibility, and, ultimately, we must all be responsible to bear our own burdens (verse5). God not only will not be mocked, this passage teaches us that He cannot be mocked.
What does that mean? It means that, if we make no effort at all to carry our own load and to fulfill our own obligations (sowing good things), then God will not cause us to reap something entirely different than what we have sown (verse 7). However, if we keep doing (sowing) good, and if we do not grow weary (enduring in faith), then we reap our harvest in "due season" (God's time - not ours) (verse 9).
I read today about a set of parents who were part of the "faith healing" crowd and who, accompanied by their pastor, allegedly prayed over their sick infant for 30 hours without seeking medical attention. Click here to read the article. Now, I do believe that healing comes by faith in the Lord, and I do believe the Lord performs miracles. However, I do not believe that means the Lord wants us to ignore the wordly treatment options available to us (remember, Luke was a doctor).
Instead, I believe the Lord wants us to sow our efforts into doing all we reasonably can to resolve our own problems, trusting Him to bless our efforts. In my own life, when I have had a problem or been confronted to the obstacle, I prayed hard for God to take care of it. Sometimes, with no more sowing than a prayer, the Lord took care of the issue, but most of the time he required me to put some effort in. I call this reaping/sowing principal "no deposit; no return."
God doesn't need our pitiful efforts - He is the all-powerful creator of the universe. However, he does require our efforts, no matter how insignificant they may seem to us. God designed the universe to work a particular way, and we are mocking both that creation and the nature of our God when we expect to reap something without sowing something (but our efforts to mock will fail when we inevitably reap what we sow). That doesn't mean God cannot perform miracles, which is His right. However, we do not get to dictate to Almighty God how he performs miracles, including the miracle of healing.
I once had a large, non-malignant mass/tumor on my spine show up in x-rays. My family and friends, in a tremendous show of faith, love, and support, prayed corporately for me. By the time my MRI results came back, the mass was gone. It didn't shrink: it was gone. Some have said the x-rays were wrong - whatever. I say, and I always will, that God had other plans for my spine. Praise Him! He healed me, and I believe the faith of my family and friends made a huge difference.
But I went to the doctor...
That's right: I didn't sow nothing. I prayed (a LOT), and I went to see a doctor. I didn't sit around with excruciating, unnatural back pain for months on end begging God to heal me without taking any actions myself to pursue treatment. I prayed, I went to the doctor, and God blessed those efforts with a harvest of healing, in His time, not in mine.
"Faith healing," is something I whole-heartedly believe in, but I don't see that as an excuse to avoid sowing our efforts toward the healing for which we are petitioning the Lord. Going to the doctor is not a sign of lacking faith - it is a practical measure that the Lord can bless. We go to the doctor, and we pray to the Lord, who will decide how to heal us - through an overt display of divine power, or through the doctors hands, or via whatever other mechanism He deems wise, in His time.
If you are sick - seek medical attention, but don't stop praying. Also, don't pray that the doctors heal you. That is a sign of lacking faith. I suggest this prayer:
"Lord, I am not feeling well, and I know something is wrong. Normally I would be afraid, but I am stepping out in faith and trusting you with my future. I pray that you heal my broken body according to your Will. In the name of Jesus I pray this, amen."
Say it. Pursue it. Believe it. Receive it. Just don't skip the pursuing - it is an essential element.
Showing posts with label Religion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Religion. Show all posts
Thursday, October 8, 2009
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
What is "stewardship" really?
Most of us have heard sermons and received instruction that we should be good stewards, but what is a "steward," and how does one become a good one? We all have some idea that stewardship relates to how we manage our property, but what is the Truth about good stewardship? What do all the sermons and instructions mean? Is this just another way for the pastor to get more of our money away from us during this financial crisis, or is this stewardship business really commanded by God?
First, lets take a look at a law from the Old Covenant (testament) that I recently received via email:
"And you shall not strip your vineyard bare, neither shall you gather the fallen grapes of your vineyard. You shall leave them for the poor and for the sojourner: I am the LORD your God" (Leviticus 19:10).
Obviously, God is commanding property owners, especially those with crops, to use them in a certain way that cares for the poor and travellers, presumably accomplishing His will that they receive care/support/food from believers. Though it may sound like a sinful question, many believers might ask themselves, "What right has God to tell us how to use our property?"
"1The earth is the LORD’s and the fullness thereof, the world and those who dwell therein, 2for he has founded it upon the seas and established it upon the rivers" (Psalms 24:1-2).
"But who am I, and what is my people, that we should be able thus to offer willingly? For all things come from you, and of your own have we given you" (1 Chronicles 29:14).
The answer is that God owns the world and everything in it, including the people. He owns it because he created it. God invented the world, and so he has, essentially, a holy patent that never expires. Like a craftsman who builds a house on his own land with his own materials and labour, who can tell such a man what to do with the house or anything in it? Does the craftsman not own that house completely?
You may have worked all your life for your savings, your possessions, and your material wealth, but you did it using God's creations. At most, we have a license to use these things, but, ultimately, they all belong to God. Take our craftsman example: assume that such a man has a child, a son, and that he provides that son with a bedroom in the house he built. We call that room the son's room, but really it belongs to the craftsman. The craftsman, also a father, has given his son charge over that room and holds him accountable for his use, care, maintenance, and general management of the room he provided. What father has never told his son, "Clean your room!"? Also, what father gives his son $500 and says, "Son go buy a lollipop,"? The father wants his son to use what he is given wisely.
In the same way, God owns everything that he has created, and he grants us a license (or "permission" if you prefer) to use it. However, God has retained the right to govern how we use the material wealth and possessions that He has created. Like the craftsman, God will require us to give an account of our use, care, maintenance, and general management of the wealth and possessions that He has provided us. For us to ask what right God has to instruct us in the use of our material wealth and possession, this is no different than the son asking his father, the craftsman, what right he has to force him to clean the room. How completely ungrateful.
The Lord has instructed us that "true religion" is caring for those in need (see this post for scriptural evidence and citations). The Lord made caring for travellers and the poor a part of His covenant with the Jewish people (Lev 19:10). The Bible makes no secret that we are, as believers, "stewards" of God's possessions rather than the true owners of our own, and the Lord, as the master of those possessions, shall require us all to give account:
"1And he [Jesus] said also unto his disciples, There was a certain rich man, which had a steward; and the same was accused unto him that he had wasted his goods. And he called him, and said unto him, How is it that I hear this of thee? give an account of thy stewardship; for thou mayest be no longer steward. 3Then the steward said within himself, What shall I do? for my lord taketh away from me the stewardship: I cannot dig; to beg I am ashamed" (Luke 16:1-3; KJV).
I cited the KJV because it uses "steward" where the ESV uses "manager." However, the two words can mean the same thing (they also can have different connotations). I have heard that, historically, the first recorded uses of the English word “steward” are from the 11th century, referring to an official who controlled the domestic affairs of a household. I do not have a citation that I trust as evidence for this, but it holds true with the Biblical usage. The root words stig and ward mean "house" and "keeper," respectively, which combined suggest that a steward is the "keeper of the house" (hence my example of the craftsman/father, his son, and the craftsman's house).
That is what we are - the keeper of our father's house. The Lord's house is this world, which he crafted himself with aid of no man. There was no man to offer aid. We are also a part of the Lord's house, created to be his stewards. After all, Adam was given charge over the Earth from the beginning, was he not? In Genesis 2:15, God put Adam in the garden "to work it and keep it". In Genesis 2:19-20, God gave Adam leave to name every animal and beast. Adam was the first steward, but he did break the one commandment of the master: do not eat of this specific tree. When Adam was required to give account for his stewardship of the garden, God asked Adam whether had eaten of the tree. When Adam admitted this, God could no longer trust Adam to remain in Eden and refrain from eating more forbidden fruit. For that reason, both Adam and Eve were cast out (Gen 2:23-24).
Good stewardship is listening and obeying the will and commands of the master/owner. It does not end with money or material possessions. All that is belongs to God - even our bodies. Will we be good stewards? Praise God for Jesus Christ, that there is mercy and grace, because none of us perfectly listen or obey. Therefore, there are no perfect stewards. But neither mercy nor grace relieves us from our responsibilities.
If I leave you readers with only one thought, then it is this: no matter how wealthy or poor you may believe that you are, nothing belongs to you: stewardship is about how you use what you are given, not how much you have. In Luke 16:10, Christ himself said, "One who is faithful in a very little is also faithful in much, and one who is dishonest in a very little is also dishonest in much."
Remember, in Mark 12:41-44, the widow gave more out of her poverty than the rich who gave out of their abundance. If you are rich and keep your money and wealth all to yourself, then you are a bad steward. If you are poor an give only the little you have to the Lord's service, then you have given much. In the same way, a believer who uses his/her talents only for personal gain has been a very poor steward of those talents, which also belong to the Lord! A person who strives to use his/her talents serve the Lord has been a good steward of them.
I will end this post by asking you to read Matthew 24:45-51. In those verses, Christ talks about the "good and faithful servant" as opposed to the "wicked servant" who watches over the master's household. I only realized very recently that the servant, as a master of the household, is a steward. When our master returns, will he put us in charge of many things, or will he "cut us to pieces" and assign us a place with the hypocrites? Salvation may be by grace, but Christ makes it clear that, in some fashion, our works, as stewards, will be judged. We will have to give an account to Christ upon his return.
First, lets take a look at a law from the Old Covenant (testament) that I recently received via email:
"And you shall not strip your vineyard bare, neither shall you gather the fallen grapes of your vineyard. You shall leave them for the poor and for the sojourner: I am the LORD your God" (Leviticus 19:10).
Obviously, God is commanding property owners, especially those with crops, to use them in a certain way that cares for the poor and travellers, presumably accomplishing His will that they receive care/support/food from believers. Though it may sound like a sinful question, many believers might ask themselves, "What right has God to tell us how to use our property?"
"1The earth is the LORD’s and the fullness thereof, the world and those who dwell therein, 2for he has founded it upon the seas and established it upon the rivers" (Psalms 24:1-2).
"But who am I, and what is my people, that we should be able thus to offer willingly? For all things come from you, and of your own have we given you" (1 Chronicles 29:14).
The answer is that God owns the world and everything in it, including the people. He owns it because he created it. God invented the world, and so he has, essentially, a holy patent that never expires. Like a craftsman who builds a house on his own land with his own materials and labour, who can tell such a man what to do with the house or anything in it? Does the craftsman not own that house completely?
You may have worked all your life for your savings, your possessions, and your material wealth, but you did it using God's creations. At most, we have a license to use these things, but, ultimately, they all belong to God. Take our craftsman example: assume that such a man has a child, a son, and that he provides that son with a bedroom in the house he built. We call that room the son's room, but really it belongs to the craftsman. The craftsman, also a father, has given his son charge over that room and holds him accountable for his use, care, maintenance, and general management of the room he provided. What father has never told his son, "Clean your room!"? Also, what father gives his son $500 and says, "Son go buy a lollipop,"? The father wants his son to use what he is given wisely.
In the same way, God owns everything that he has created, and he grants us a license (or "permission" if you prefer) to use it. However, God has retained the right to govern how we use the material wealth and possessions that He has created. Like the craftsman, God will require us to give an account of our use, care, maintenance, and general management of the wealth and possessions that He has provided us. For us to ask what right God has to instruct us in the use of our material wealth and possession, this is no different than the son asking his father, the craftsman, what right he has to force him to clean the room. How completely ungrateful.
The Lord has instructed us that "true religion" is caring for those in need (see this post for scriptural evidence and citations). The Lord made caring for travellers and the poor a part of His covenant with the Jewish people (Lev 19:10). The Bible makes no secret that we are, as believers, "stewards" of God's possessions rather than the true owners of our own, and the Lord, as the master of those possessions, shall require us all to give account:
"1And he [Jesus] said also unto his disciples, There was a certain rich man, which had a steward; and the same was accused unto him that he had wasted his goods. And he called him, and said unto him, How is it that I hear this of thee? give an account of thy stewardship; for thou mayest be no longer steward. 3Then the steward said within himself, What shall I do? for my lord taketh away from me the stewardship: I cannot dig; to beg I am ashamed" (Luke 16:1-3; KJV).
I cited the KJV because it uses "steward" where the ESV uses "manager." However, the two words can mean the same thing (they also can have different connotations). I have heard that, historically, the first recorded uses of the English word “steward” are from the 11th century, referring to an official who controlled the domestic affairs of a household. I do not have a citation that I trust as evidence for this, but it holds true with the Biblical usage. The root words stig and ward mean "house" and "keeper," respectively, which combined suggest that a steward is the "keeper of the house" (hence my example of the craftsman/father, his son, and the craftsman's house).
That is what we are - the keeper of our father's house. The Lord's house is this world, which he crafted himself with aid of no man. There was no man to offer aid. We are also a part of the Lord's house, created to be his stewards. After all, Adam was given charge over the Earth from the beginning, was he not? In Genesis 2:15, God put Adam in the garden "to work it and keep it". In Genesis 2:19-20, God gave Adam leave to name every animal and beast. Adam was the first steward, but he did break the one commandment of the master: do not eat of this specific tree. When Adam was required to give account for his stewardship of the garden, God asked Adam whether had eaten of the tree. When Adam admitted this, God could no longer trust Adam to remain in Eden and refrain from eating more forbidden fruit. For that reason, both Adam and Eve were cast out (Gen 2:23-24).
Good stewardship is listening and obeying the will and commands of the master/owner. It does not end with money or material possessions. All that is belongs to God - even our bodies. Will we be good stewards? Praise God for Jesus Christ, that there is mercy and grace, because none of us perfectly listen or obey. Therefore, there are no perfect stewards. But neither mercy nor grace relieves us from our responsibilities.
If I leave you readers with only one thought, then it is this: no matter how wealthy or poor you may believe that you are, nothing belongs to you: stewardship is about how you use what you are given, not how much you have. In Luke 16:10, Christ himself said, "One who is faithful in a very little is also faithful in much, and one who is dishonest in a very little is also dishonest in much."
Remember, in Mark 12:41-44, the widow gave more out of her poverty than the rich who gave out of their abundance. If you are rich and keep your money and wealth all to yourself, then you are a bad steward. If you are poor an give only the little you have to the Lord's service, then you have given much. In the same way, a believer who uses his/her talents only for personal gain has been a very poor steward of those talents, which also belong to the Lord! A person who strives to use his/her talents serve the Lord has been a good steward of them.
I will end this post by asking you to read Matthew 24:45-51. In those verses, Christ talks about the "good and faithful servant" as opposed to the "wicked servant" who watches over the master's household. I only realized very recently that the servant, as a master of the household, is a steward. When our master returns, will he put us in charge of many things, or will he "cut us to pieces" and assign us a place with the hypocrites? Salvation may be by grace, but Christ makes it clear that, in some fashion, our works, as stewards, will be judged. We will have to give an account to Christ upon his return.
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Free Legal Tip No. 1: Avoid Court by Making Peace
If you are reading ATI (this blog), then you most likely believe that Jesus Christ is the son of God, made flesh, and sacrificed for our sins. Assuming this is true, then you should be aware that Jesus had a few things to say about resolving conflicts. I am writing this post not only because I am interested in the subject personally and professionally, but also because I believe that many if not most churches have dropped the ball in this area.
To start the ball rolling again, lets look at Christ's words:
" 15If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. 16But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every charge may be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses. 17If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. 18Truly, I say to you,whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven" (Matt 18:15-18).
"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God" (Matt 5:9).
These verses are famous. Notice, these scripture are not directed at non-believers. They are a command to children of God to resolve their disputes in a way that is different from how the secular world resolves its disputes. When was the last time you heard of or saw someone take a dispute before the church body or leadership? Again, many churches have dropped the ball, but so have many believers. After all, the process starts with the believer, not with the church.
First, Christ advises us to attempt to resolve disputes among believers privately, by discussion between just the persons involved (see Matt 18:15). If a private discussion does not resolve the dispute, then Christ advises us to bring it before 1 or 2 other believers (Matt 18:16), but if the conflict continues, then Christ advises us to take it before the Church (Matt 18:17). Where someone refuses to listen to the Church, Christ advises us to treat him in the same fashion as a non-believer (Matt 18:17). Regardless, Christ has taught us that those who seek first to make peace shall be blessed (Matt 5:9).
As an attorney, I often see people, even believers, taking others to court. Often, the decision to sue someone is a person's immediate reaction to a conflict/dispute, and that is unfortunate. It is true that I get paid to handle litigation (civil lawsuits), but it is also true that I get paid to help people find less expensive, less damaging ways to resolve their problems. My favorite method is "Christian conciliation," which is a fancy way of saying: resolve your disputes Biblically!
There are many reasons to look to the Bible when presented with a dispute. The first is, obviously, to please, honor, and glorify God. Every conflict/dispute is an opportunity to for those involved to glorify God by following His Word. A second reason to resolve a dispute Biblically is that the Bible promises that persons striving to make peace will be blessed (Matthew 5 does not qualify that statement). Probably, any remaining advantages to Biblical resolution of disputes/conflicts flow from that blessing. However, to be more specific, there are three more really good reasons to resolve your disputes Biblically: (1) it works; and (2) it focuses on reparining damaged relationships not just chasing money; and (3) it is almost always cheaper/more cost-effective than going to court.
The following is a common fee structure for a superior court in Georgia: $85 to file for divorce; $80 for other civil actions (including business disputes and personal injuries); and $25 each time the sheriff has to serve someone with process (at least once per each defendant in a lawsuit). These fees are in addition to those of your attorney. Attorneys handle most cases on an hourly rate or a flat rate based on a projected number of hours at an hourly rate, so the longer it takes to resolve your dispute, the more it will cost you.
Litigation begins with the filing of a complaint and continues through judgment and all appeals. This process can take years to complete. The discovery (investigation) phase alone can last up to 6 months or more. While litigation might result in you receiving a money judgment, there is never a guarantee you will win. If you lose, then you are worse off than when you started. If you win, you may still get a judgment for an amount less than the cost of bringing the lawsuit, making the lawsuit a waste of time and money. Even if you get a huge judgment, it has to be collected, and it is tough to "squeeze blood out of a turnip," so to speak.
So, what is the Biblical alternative? First, try to work out your disputes privately, just like Christ encouraged. Often, conflicts can just be "taked out." Sometimes, in more difficult situations, negotiation resulting in a written agreement can be used to both prevent and settle disputes (it is often helpful, even at this stage, to get a legal professional to actually draft any written agreements to ensure that they will work in court, but you can also do it yourself).
If you cannot resolve a conflict with a fellow believer privately, then get a couple brothers/sisters from church to listen to all sides and help you work out the dispute. If that doesn't work, then get your pastor and the church involved. Surely you trust men and women of God to judge your dispute more than you would a secular judge/jury?
If none of these options work, then Christ tells us treat that opponent as a non-believer (assuming s/he is a believer to begin with). When that happens, it is time to discuss your options with an attorney (if you have not done so already). Remember, if you truly cannot afford to hire an attorney - there are non-profit organizations like Legal Aid available to assist you.
A good attorney will listen to your problem and walk you through the pros and cons of each option available to you (as opposed to just telling you what to do with no explanation). A good attorney should also advise you that there are alternatives to litigation and courts, even when dealing with non-believers. Your attorney can often negotiate a settlement or help you in obtaining a mediation or arbitration of the dispute. Mediation involves sitting down with a skilled mediator who listens to both sides and helps them find a mutually agreeable solution to the problem that the parties sign off on as a legally binding settlement. Arbitration is an alternative to litigation and trials where an arbitrator hears both sides and issues and issues a legally binding decision (much like a judge).
If you hire a Christian attorney (I know we're rare, but we do exist), then he will (hopefully) introduce you to Peacemaker Ministries (http://www.peacemaker.net/), which provides believers with Christian mediation and arbitration services that will focus on repairing the relationships involved rather than just the conflicts.
As a last resort, you can still take your opponent(s) to court. Christ advises us treat believers who refuse to resolve their disputes Biblically as though they were non-believers. Sometimes, it is best to "turn the other cheek," but this does not always result in making peace. Peacemakers are blessed, not peacefakers (the term "peacefaker" was coined by Ken Sande, president of Peacemaker Ministries and author of "The Peacemaker").
Ignoring a continuing, ongoing dispute is not making but faking peace by turning a blind eye to the conflict. There are disputes that have to be actively resolved, and "turning the other cheek" does not mean that we can just ignore all our problems until they go away. I could write a whole post on discerning which disputes can be overlooked and which ones cannot, but suffice it to say that there are disputes/conflicts (such as physical abuse, marital strife, employment disputes...) that must be resolved and cannot be overlooked if peace is to be made. When such a conflict arises, it is always wise to seek the Lord's will first. It is also wise, when someone is physically hurting you, to immediately seek legal counsel and judicial intervention to keep you safe until a solution is found and peace can be made.
Whatever you decide, remember that, as a Christian, we must consider both what gives glory to God and what will result in peace. Often the best way to discern what will give God glory in a situation is to read His Word, mediate upon it, and to pray. God will lead you out of the darkness.
Bottom line: going to court isn't cheap, and while it might get you some money, it rarely glorifies God or repairs any damage to the relationships involved. Also, there are usually alternatives available that are more efficient and cost-effective.
To start the ball rolling again, lets look at Christ's words:
" 15If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. 16But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every charge may be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses. 17If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. 18Truly, I say to you,whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven" (Matt 18:15-18).
"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God" (Matt 5:9).
These verses are famous. Notice, these scripture are not directed at non-believers. They are a command to children of God to resolve their disputes in a way that is different from how the secular world resolves its disputes. When was the last time you heard of or saw someone take a dispute before the church body or leadership? Again, many churches have dropped the ball, but so have many believers. After all, the process starts with the believer, not with the church.
First, Christ advises us to attempt to resolve disputes among believers privately, by discussion between just the persons involved (see Matt 18:15). If a private discussion does not resolve the dispute, then Christ advises us to bring it before 1 or 2 other believers (Matt 18:16), but if the conflict continues, then Christ advises us to take it before the Church (Matt 18:17). Where someone refuses to listen to the Church, Christ advises us to treat him in the same fashion as a non-believer (Matt 18:17). Regardless, Christ has taught us that those who seek first to make peace shall be blessed (Matt 5:9).
As an attorney, I often see people, even believers, taking others to court. Often, the decision to sue someone is a person's immediate reaction to a conflict/dispute, and that is unfortunate. It is true that I get paid to handle litigation (civil lawsuits), but it is also true that I get paid to help people find less expensive, less damaging ways to resolve their problems. My favorite method is "Christian conciliation," which is a fancy way of saying: resolve your disputes Biblically!
There are many reasons to look to the Bible when presented with a dispute. The first is, obviously, to please, honor, and glorify God. Every conflict/dispute is an opportunity to for those involved to glorify God by following His Word. A second reason to resolve a dispute Biblically is that the Bible promises that persons striving to make peace will be blessed (Matthew 5 does not qualify that statement). Probably, any remaining advantages to Biblical resolution of disputes/conflicts flow from that blessing. However, to be more specific, there are three more really good reasons to resolve your disputes Biblically: (1) it works; and (2) it focuses on reparining damaged relationships not just chasing money; and (3) it is almost always cheaper/more cost-effective than going to court.
The following is a common fee structure for a superior court in Georgia: $85 to file for divorce; $80 for other civil actions (including business disputes and personal injuries); and $25 each time the sheriff has to serve someone with process (at least once per each defendant in a lawsuit). These fees are in addition to those of your attorney. Attorneys handle most cases on an hourly rate or a flat rate based on a projected number of hours at an hourly rate, so the longer it takes to resolve your dispute, the more it will cost you.
Litigation begins with the filing of a complaint and continues through judgment and all appeals. This process can take years to complete. The discovery (investigation) phase alone can last up to 6 months or more. While litigation might result in you receiving a money judgment, there is never a guarantee you will win. If you lose, then you are worse off than when you started. If you win, you may still get a judgment for an amount less than the cost of bringing the lawsuit, making the lawsuit a waste of time and money. Even if you get a huge judgment, it has to be collected, and it is tough to "squeeze blood out of a turnip," so to speak.
So, what is the Biblical alternative? First, try to work out your disputes privately, just like Christ encouraged. Often, conflicts can just be "taked out." Sometimes, in more difficult situations, negotiation resulting in a written agreement can be used to both prevent and settle disputes (it is often helpful, even at this stage, to get a legal professional to actually draft any written agreements to ensure that they will work in court, but you can also do it yourself).
If you cannot resolve a conflict with a fellow believer privately, then get a couple brothers/sisters from church to listen to all sides and help you work out the dispute. If that doesn't work, then get your pastor and the church involved. Surely you trust men and women of God to judge your dispute more than you would a secular judge/jury?
If none of these options work, then Christ tells us treat that opponent as a non-believer (assuming s/he is a believer to begin with). When that happens, it is time to discuss your options with an attorney (if you have not done so already). Remember, if you truly cannot afford to hire an attorney - there are non-profit organizations like Legal Aid available to assist you.
A good attorney will listen to your problem and walk you through the pros and cons of each option available to you (as opposed to just telling you what to do with no explanation). A good attorney should also advise you that there are alternatives to litigation and courts, even when dealing with non-believers. Your attorney can often negotiate a settlement or help you in obtaining a mediation or arbitration of the dispute. Mediation involves sitting down with a skilled mediator who listens to both sides and helps them find a mutually agreeable solution to the problem that the parties sign off on as a legally binding settlement. Arbitration is an alternative to litigation and trials where an arbitrator hears both sides and issues and issues a legally binding decision (much like a judge).
If you hire a Christian attorney (I know we're rare, but we do exist), then he will (hopefully) introduce you to Peacemaker Ministries (http://www.peacemaker.net/), which provides believers with Christian mediation and arbitration services that will focus on repairing the relationships involved rather than just the conflicts.
As a last resort, you can still take your opponent(s) to court. Christ advises us treat believers who refuse to resolve their disputes Biblically as though they were non-believers. Sometimes, it is best to "turn the other cheek," but this does not always result in making peace. Peacemakers are blessed, not peacefakers (the term "peacefaker" was coined by Ken Sande, president of Peacemaker Ministries and author of "The Peacemaker").
Ignoring a continuing, ongoing dispute is not making but faking peace by turning a blind eye to the conflict. There are disputes that have to be actively resolved, and "turning the other cheek" does not mean that we can just ignore all our problems until they go away. I could write a whole post on discerning which disputes can be overlooked and which ones cannot, but suffice it to say that there are disputes/conflicts (such as physical abuse, marital strife, employment disputes...) that must be resolved and cannot be overlooked if peace is to be made. When such a conflict arises, it is always wise to seek the Lord's will first. It is also wise, when someone is physically hurting you, to immediately seek legal counsel and judicial intervention to keep you safe until a solution is found and peace can be made.
Whatever you decide, remember that, as a Christian, we must consider both what gives glory to God and what will result in peace. Often the best way to discern what will give God glory in a situation is to read His Word, mediate upon it, and to pray. God will lead you out of the darkness.
Bottom line: going to court isn't cheap, and while it might get you some money, it rarely glorifies God or repairs any damage to the relationships involved. Also, there are usually alternatives available that are more efficient and cost-effective.
***Disclaimer: I am an attorney, but I am not YOUR attorney, meaning that the advice in this blog post is general advice for the masses and not tailored to anyone's specific needs/concerns/issues. I advise anyone with a legal question or a conflict to speak with an attorney and give that attorney the benefit of all the facts. Obviously, the best legal advice will come from a skilled and trustworthy attorney fully acquainted with the situation you are facing rather than someone offering legal tips on a blog.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
A wise man seeks wise counsel (no. 1).
I found a website discussing the relationship between wisdom and accepting advice from a Biblical perspective. In doing so, I found the following scriptures:
"The way of a fool is right in his own eyes, but he who heeds counsel is wise" (Proverbs 12:15). "By pride comes nothing but strife, but with the well-advised is wisdom" (Proverbs 13:10). "The ear that hears the rebukes of life will abide among the wise. He who disdains instruction despises his own soul, but he who heeds rebuke gets understanding" (Proverbs 15:31). "Listen to counsel and receive instruction, that you may be wise in your latter days" (Proverbs 19:20).
The point these scriptures make, when read together, is not to take every piece of advice that you receive as proven fact/truth. However, these scriptures send a solid message that it IS wise to listen to wise counsel. In other words, it is wise to consider the advice of those wiser or more learned than ourselves before we make decisions or take actions. That advice does not free us of the need to purposefully consider our decisions/actions before taking them. However, prayerfully contemplating the counsel you receive on a subject, make the wisest decision or take the wisest action.
Remember, wisdom often comes with age (Proverbs 19:20 - "...wise in you latter days"). I am smarter than some who are older than I am, but I am often less wise. Perhaps I am wiser than some who are older, but it is generally true that, the longer a person lives, the more experiences that person has, the more opportunities that person has to grow in wisdom. Granted, not every person older than me has seized the opportunities that he or she has received, and some of older persons may even be foolish. Remember, wisdom comes from the Lord first, so if you meet an older person who does not have the Lord in his/her life, then that person has chosen to avoid wisdom in every moment of his/her life. Always look for wisdom in the Bible first: if a person contradicts the Bible, how wise can that person truly be?
However, a person's age, at a minimum, is a good indicator of how much exposure that person has had to wisdom. Those who have lived long lives and accepted the opportunities for growth afforded to them by the Lord could be a wealth of wisdom and good counsel. While my parents, for instance, are reasonably intelligent people, I am sure neither of them has anything on Albert Einstein or Benjamin Franklin. It is my parents' wisdom that compels me to seek advice from them before so many others that may or may not be smarter. My father is a pastor, and my mother was my first Sunday School teacher. I know that every piece of advice they give me comes from a person who has sought wisdom from the Lord for many, many years. Those learned in the Word usually make the best advisors, meaning that they tend to give good advice.
Why does this matter? Whether you believe it or not, none of us knows everything. None of us has everything, and none of us can do everything. We all are imperfect, and we all need help from time to time. The Word of God teaches us that, "The way of a fool is right in his own eyes, but he who heeds counsel is wise." Why would anyone think that s/he is always right? Pride. "By pride comes nothing but strife." However, "... with the well-advised is wisdom."
Do you trust God? Do you trust the Bible? If so, then you should not trust yourself - not in all things. The Bible says that we do not know everything and that we all need to listen. Do you agree? If not, then there is no point in your reading any further - I cannot help you (only the Lord can). If you do agree, then ask yourself this: where do you go for advice? Who do you turn to with your problems? Who do you listen to? Are your advisors wise counselors? Are you willing to give heed to someone else's judgment before your own, even where you disagree?
In my own life, I recently sought advice from a church elder regarding how to handle a situation that I did not feel fully equipped to handle alone. The elder agreed to take over the situation, and my load was greatly decreased for seeking his advice. Other times in my life, I have chosen to follow my own judgment. Sometimes that was wise, and, at other times, it was just stubbornness.
At this stage in my life, however, I take comfort in knowing that I need to be intentionally considering whose judgment is wisest to follow, and the answer is not always mine. It really helps me to get through each day knowing that I am not trying to live my life by my wisdom alone. If you let it, that process will give you comfort. There is an expression that I am fond of: "no man is an island." I think that fits well here. All believers are connected together as the body of Christ. We are the Church - capital "C" - and we work best together. That is how we were made.
UPDATE: See the second article in this series here.
"The way of a fool is right in his own eyes, but he who heeds counsel is wise" (Proverbs 12:15). "By pride comes nothing but strife, but with the well-advised is wisdom" (Proverbs 13:10). "The ear that hears the rebukes of life will abide among the wise. He who disdains instruction despises his own soul, but he who heeds rebuke gets understanding" (Proverbs 15:31). "Listen to counsel and receive instruction, that you may be wise in your latter days" (Proverbs 19:20).
The point these scriptures make, when read together, is not to take every piece of advice that you receive as proven fact/truth. However, these scriptures send a solid message that it IS wise to listen to wise counsel. In other words, it is wise to consider the advice of those wiser or more learned than ourselves before we make decisions or take actions. That advice does not free us of the need to purposefully consider our decisions/actions before taking them. However, prayerfully contemplating the counsel you receive on a subject, make the wisest decision or take the wisest action.
Remember, wisdom often comes with age (Proverbs 19:20 - "...wise in you latter days"). I am smarter than some who are older than I am, but I am often less wise. Perhaps I am wiser than some who are older, but it is generally true that, the longer a person lives, the more experiences that person has, the more opportunities that person has to grow in wisdom. Granted, not every person older than me has seized the opportunities that he or she has received, and some of older persons may even be foolish. Remember, wisdom comes from the Lord first, so if you meet an older person who does not have the Lord in his/her life, then that person has chosen to avoid wisdom in every moment of his/her life. Always look for wisdom in the Bible first: if a person contradicts the Bible, how wise can that person truly be?
However, a person's age, at a minimum, is a good indicator of how much exposure that person has had to wisdom. Those who have lived long lives and accepted the opportunities for growth afforded to them by the Lord could be a wealth of wisdom and good counsel. While my parents, for instance, are reasonably intelligent people, I am sure neither of them has anything on Albert Einstein or Benjamin Franklin. It is my parents' wisdom that compels me to seek advice from them before so many others that may or may not be smarter. My father is a pastor, and my mother was my first Sunday School teacher. I know that every piece of advice they give me comes from a person who has sought wisdom from the Lord for many, many years. Those learned in the Word usually make the best advisors, meaning that they tend to give good advice.
Why does this matter? Whether you believe it or not, none of us knows everything. None of us has everything, and none of us can do everything. We all are imperfect, and we all need help from time to time. The Word of God teaches us that, "The way of a fool is right in his own eyes, but he who heeds counsel is wise." Why would anyone think that s/he is always right? Pride. "By pride comes nothing but strife." However, "... with the well-advised is wisdom."
Do you trust God? Do you trust the Bible? If so, then you should not trust yourself - not in all things. The Bible says that we do not know everything and that we all need to listen. Do you agree? If not, then there is no point in your reading any further - I cannot help you (only the Lord can). If you do agree, then ask yourself this: where do you go for advice? Who do you turn to with your problems? Who do you listen to? Are your advisors wise counselors? Are you willing to give heed to someone else's judgment before your own, even where you disagree?
In my own life, I recently sought advice from a church elder regarding how to handle a situation that I did not feel fully equipped to handle alone. The elder agreed to take over the situation, and my load was greatly decreased for seeking his advice. Other times in my life, I have chosen to follow my own judgment. Sometimes that was wise, and, at other times, it was just stubbornness.
At this stage in my life, however, I take comfort in knowing that I need to be intentionally considering whose judgment is wisest to follow, and the answer is not always mine. It really helps me to get through each day knowing that I am not trying to live my life by my wisdom alone. If you let it, that process will give you comfort. There is an expression that I am fond of: "no man is an island." I think that fits well here. All believers are connected together as the body of Christ. We are the Church - capital "C" - and we work best together. That is how we were made.
UPDATE: See the second article in this series here.
Thursday, January 29, 2009
True religion in action.
As a followup to our post on what "true religion" is and why believers should be proud to call themselves "religious" (read it here), I'd like to point our readers to a minister who is practicing true religion. Take a look for yourself here.
Summed up, this minister put true religion into practice by selling his $50,000.00 Infiniti Coupe in order to save $600 a month. With those savings, he sponsors children through Compassion International. The idea is to live with less in order to give more.
So, what's the point? Do you need to sell your car and buy a clunker? That's not what I am preaching here, folks. However, I do support their idea: make reductions in your spending on material things and use it to ensure that the impoverished get to eat and sleep under a roof. James 1:27 teaches us that true religion is (1)being unstained by the world; and (2) aiding those in need. Isn't it interesting how those two things are related? It's easier to visit the needy when you've focused less on material gain.
So, you could buy that $50k car, or you could make do with one that costs $25k or even $15k. The $25-35k you save would do a lot for a ministry like Compassion. You don't have to sponsor a child - make a 1-time donation to the unsponsored children's fund. It doesn't obligate you to dfo more, and your money goes directly to support children who have no one to sponsor or support them.
If children aren't your conviction, then feel free to support Food For the Poor. Feeding the hungry is a powerful witness for the Christian faith.
Please, do not think that because you cannot give a lot that your donation won't mean a lot to organizations like these. If 100 people give a 1-time donation of $1, then these roganizations can use that $100 to provide food and shelter to many who don't have it. In many third-world economies, the US dollar still goes a long way. Ever dollar donated is a major victory for those in need. Please stop to consider their needa.
You do not need to be "convicted" to donate $1 or even $10. Do it because you know the Lord your God considers it to be true religion. Do it because you want to love as Jesus did: sacrificially. Do it because God considers it a loan that he will repay (Proverbs 19:17). Just don't do it to make yourself look pious or righteous in the eyes of others (Matthew 6:1-4).
Have a heart. There are many who are suffering in this world, and they need your help. Please, please, give to one of these organizations and practice the religion that you preach.
Summed up, this minister put true religion into practice by selling his $50,000.00 Infiniti Coupe in order to save $600 a month. With those savings, he sponsors children through Compassion International. The idea is to live with less in order to give more.
So, what's the point? Do you need to sell your car and buy a clunker? That's not what I am preaching here, folks. However, I do support their idea: make reductions in your spending on material things and use it to ensure that the impoverished get to eat and sleep under a roof. James 1:27 teaches us that true religion is (1)being unstained by the world; and (2) aiding those in need. Isn't it interesting how those two things are related? It's easier to visit the needy when you've focused less on material gain.
So, you could buy that $50k car, or you could make do with one that costs $25k or even $15k. The $25-35k you save would do a lot for a ministry like Compassion. You don't have to sponsor a child - make a 1-time donation to the unsponsored children's fund. It doesn't obligate you to dfo more, and your money goes directly to support children who have no one to sponsor or support them.
If children aren't your conviction, then feel free to support Food For the Poor. Feeding the hungry is a powerful witness for the Christian faith.
Please, do not think that because you cannot give a lot that your donation won't mean a lot to organizations like these. If 100 people give a 1-time donation of $1, then these roganizations can use that $100 to provide food and shelter to many who don't have it. In many third-world economies, the US dollar still goes a long way. Ever dollar donated is a major victory for those in need. Please stop to consider their needa.
You do not need to be "convicted" to donate $1 or even $10. Do it because you know the Lord your God considers it to be true religion. Do it because you want to love as Jesus did: sacrificially. Do it because God considers it a loan that he will repay (Proverbs 19:17). Just don't do it to make yourself look pious or righteous in the eyes of others (Matthew 6:1-4).
Have a heart. There are many who are suffering in this world, and they need your help. Please, please, give to one of these organizations and practice the religion that you preach.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Update regarding our earlier post on sexual immorality.
I recently read a blog about the former Regent dean of students I referenced in our earlier post on sexual immorality. Cited below is a comment I made at that blog in response to the absolute hatred being slung at Christians by the commenters. The source of this hatred? Because one Christian, formerly a law professor and dean, has stumbled, the world believes that Christians are hypocrites. Please, if you read my response to the commenters below and have an opinion, feel free to express it in the comment section below.
"I think it is important to remind people that Christians (those who actually follow Christ's teachings) profess to be neither perfect nor without sin. In fact, to be saved, one must admit that he is a sinner in need of Christ's sacrifice to pay the penalty for that sin.
Every sin is an offense against God. Every single one, no matter how great or how small, and sitting in a jail cell does nothing to undo that offense in the eyes of the Lord. There is nothing a human being can do, on his or her own, to reconcile or "make amends" with God.
Stephen McPherson has admitted to sinning against God and to breaking the law of man as well. The jail time will pay his debt to society. Only Jesus could pay his debt to God.
Being Christian is not about being righteous or sinless. It is about admitting that you are a sinner struggling with temptation to do evil and accepting Christ's blood as the sacrificial price to cover each time you fail in that struggle.
Stephen McPherson is no hypocrite. By being a Christian he is a self-professed sinner. Though his sins may be reprehensible, they are not unforgivable. He was forgiven the moment he accepted Jesus.
I do not approve of what he had admitted to doing with those girls, but he will be punished, and it is not my place or your to judge him. Rather, we should forgive him because we know that we have also sinned, though perhaps in different ways. If you ever want to be forgiven, then you must first forgive. At least, that's the Biblical perspective."
Sexual immorality in the Church: should sinners be pastors or leaders?
Priests and pastors are accused of sexual immorality at an alarming and ever-increasing rate these days. I attended Regent University School of Law, a Christian institution, and one of its former dean of students has pleaded guilty to sex crimes. A newer minister at my church was recently dismissed after confessing to adultery.
So, what do we take away from this? From reading recent blog entries, it appears that the secular community views Christians as hypocrites because some Christians sin in the area of sexual immorality. How can this be when we know God is not fond of hypocrites (reference Matthew 23)?
I believe that every sin committed by a believer is evidence in support of the need for Jesus Christ. After all, why would believers need Christ's sacrificial grace if we didn't sin? We aren't hypocrites when we sin - we're just honest examples of Christians incapable of fulfilling the law on our own and in desperate need of God's mercy, which is new each day (Lamentations 3:22-23). So, when a man stumbles, even when he causes harm to a child, this is not an excuse to lose faith. Instead, it should renew our faith in God's message: that even the best man is fallen and needs the saving grace and mercy the Lord has provided through Jesus Christ.
So, do we punish evil? Certainly the laws of God and of men must be enforced, and justice must be done. However, does that excuse us to condemn/excommunicate/hate the sinners? I suggest that we show mercy to those who stumble if we expect to receive mercy ourselves. I believe there is a verse for that, but it escapes me at the moment.
It is when we believers attempt to cover up or hide the fact that we sin that we are truly being hypocritical. Instead, we need to accept that believers sin, and, when the secular world says: "See - the Christians sin too," we need to address that by saying, "you have better believe we sin, and we know it, but praise the Lord we have Jesus to save us from it!"
Lets not, as the Church, judge the sinners (unless we are also judges) or focus on appearing perfectly righteous (which we aren't). Rather, lets focus on admitting we all sin and struggle against it. Perhaps then non-believers, also sinners, will feel welcome in the church building, comforted by the knowledge that they are surrounded by other sinners looking for mercy, forgiveness, and especially grace - just ... like ... them.
So, lets be slow to judge, quick to forgive even the most controversial/taboo sins, and accepting of imperfect people. We all believe (supposedly) that even a murderer can repent and be saved, but how many would go so far as to invite them to church? What if the murderer came and felt called to preach? Can Jimmy Swaggart, who was caught with a prostitute, continue to preach?
Show me a perfect preacher. Show me a preacher without sin. My father is a pastor, and he would tell you that he is far from perfect, but he knows that the people he preaches to need to hear about his struggles/experiences overcoming temptation and sin. People don't need a "perfect" preacher any more than they need a Pharisee to stand behind the pulpit. They need honest, real ministers with real experiences who they can relate to, that have something relevant to say about their daily struggle to live a life accepting to the Lord, unstained by the world (James 1:27).
One of the most amazing messages I ever heard preached was from a former pornography addict named Gene McConnell who came close to raping a woman before the Holy Spirit convicted him to release her. He spoke at a Campus Crusade for Christ meeting I attended at WSU, and the power of his message gives real, genuine hope to the men and women afflicted by pornography and sexual crimes, made only more potent by his personal experiences and testimony. So, should a man with a weakness for sexual immorality be preaching to college students on that subject? You bet he should.
Just read the comments on this blog about his message at OSU here (not appropriate for children). Note that this blog may or may not be endorsed by Gene (I found it through Google). Some of the student comments are particularly alarming:
So, what do we take away from this? From reading recent blog entries, it appears that the secular community views Christians as hypocrites because some Christians sin in the area of sexual immorality. How can this be when we know God is not fond of hypocrites (reference Matthew 23)?
I believe that every sin committed by a believer is evidence in support of the need for Jesus Christ. After all, why would believers need Christ's sacrificial grace if we didn't sin? We aren't hypocrites when we sin - we're just honest examples of Christians incapable of fulfilling the law on our own and in desperate need of God's mercy, which is new each day (Lamentations 3:22-23). So, when a man stumbles, even when he causes harm to a child, this is not an excuse to lose faith. Instead, it should renew our faith in God's message: that even the best man is fallen and needs the saving grace and mercy the Lord has provided through Jesus Christ.
So, do we punish evil? Certainly the laws of God and of men must be enforced, and justice must be done. However, does that excuse us to condemn/excommunicate/hate the sinners? I suggest that we show mercy to those who stumble if we expect to receive mercy ourselves. I believe there is a verse for that, but it escapes me at the moment.
It is when we believers attempt to cover up or hide the fact that we sin that we are truly being hypocritical. Instead, we need to accept that believers sin, and, when the secular world says: "See - the Christians sin too," we need to address that by saying, "you have better believe we sin, and we know it, but praise the Lord we have Jesus to save us from it!"
Lets not, as the Church, judge the sinners (unless we are also judges) or focus on appearing perfectly righteous (which we aren't). Rather, lets focus on admitting we all sin and struggle against it. Perhaps then non-believers, also sinners, will feel welcome in the church building, comforted by the knowledge that they are surrounded by other sinners looking for mercy, forgiveness, and especially grace - just ... like ... them.
So, lets be slow to judge, quick to forgive even the most controversial/taboo sins, and accepting of imperfect people. We all believe (supposedly) that even a murderer can repent and be saved, but how many would go so far as to invite them to church? What if the murderer came and felt called to preach? Can Jimmy Swaggart, who was caught with a prostitute, continue to preach?
Show me a perfect preacher. Show me a preacher without sin. My father is a pastor, and he would tell you that he is far from perfect, but he knows that the people he preaches to need to hear about his struggles/experiences overcoming temptation and sin. People don't need a "perfect" preacher any more than they need a Pharisee to stand behind the pulpit. They need honest, real ministers with real experiences who they can relate to, that have something relevant to say about their daily struggle to live a life accepting to the Lord, unstained by the world (James 1:27).
One of the most amazing messages I ever heard preached was from a former pornography addict named Gene McConnell who came close to raping a woman before the Holy Spirit convicted him to release her. He spoke at a Campus Crusade for Christ meeting I attended at WSU, and the power of his message gives real, genuine hope to the men and women afflicted by pornography and sexual crimes, made only more potent by his personal experiences and testimony. So, should a man with a weakness for sexual immorality be preaching to college students on that subject? You bet he should.
Just read the comments on this blog about his message at OSU here (not appropriate for children). Note that this blog may or may not be endorsed by Gene (I found it through Google). Some of the student comments are particularly alarming:
- "While I agree 100% with the basic message, I wasn't impressed with some of the content. Frankly, hearing about many of the disgusting things the speaker has done in his past was a bit more than I bargained for."
- "Everything and anything, if done to excess can be harmful. I enjoy viewing porn, just like I enjoy drinking alcohol and other such things. That does not mean I am addicted to either or that my behavior is harmful. People that go around the country preaching the evils of porn are just pathetic. "
It is scary that there are people actually defending porn after hearing Gene's message and that others, who are believers, are too fearful to face the truth. Gene is a man who loves the Lord and has checked his pride at the door to share his sinful past with those men and women suffering from the "Power of Porn." I know several men at WSU were released from bondage after Gene's seminar. I embraced one friend who cried for almost 15 minutes as we prayed with Gene. He was the last guy I would have expected to have a problem with porn: he could have had any woman he wanted, a Bible study leader, etc. Did I feel betrayed that he, a Christian, had sinned? Of course not. He was struggling, but he was also a true believer all the same. Condemning a man for sinning is the height of hypocrisy.
I agree most with this comment regarding Gene:
- "Powerful. transparent. A message to those who thing this is too much info: powerful battles require powerful messages, and this one delivers."
So, the next time you look down on a Christian, be it a priest, a pastor, or just a friend, for sinning in an area the Church finds to be taboo, consider this: what sins have you committed that the other believers would frown on if they knew of them? What if the tables were turned?
So, should sinners be allowed to preach/lead/teach? I sure hope so, or we are all going to be short a few pastors/leaders/teachers. Sinners like Gene have great testimonies, and Gene's message proves that there can be victory over sin for men, not just Christ. Sure, we all believe that Christ conquered sin on the cross, but he didn't do it just as an example. He conquered sin so that we might be free!
I charge you all: bring back the sinners you have cast out from your church buildings. Remember that the real Church is the body of Christ, composed of believers, who are all sinners. Casting out a man or woman for committing a sin, even a taboo/sexual sin, is hypocritical and a bit looney toons.
That's just my take, though. Listen to Gene's message and judge for yourselves whether you want sinners behind the pulpit and in the classroom.
God bless you all.
Monday, January 12, 2009
Race and Culture in Politics and Religion
"There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise" (Galatians 3:28-29).
Was there no racism or sexism in the world Paul lived in at the time he wrote the scripture above? Of course there was. If memory serves, and I could be mistaken, then Galatians was written contemporaneously with Caligula's rule of the Roman Empire, which was famous for making slaves of men of all races. Slaves were also forced to risk their lives as both gladiators and prostitutes in Rome to increase the girth of their masters' purses. So what did Paul mean?
"You are all one in Christ Jesus" was a deliberate departure from a world filled with slavery and prejudice. Remember, "The greatest among you shall be your servant. Whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted" (Matthew 23:11-12).
So, it is clear from scripture that, insofar as God is concerned, we are all equal. So why, for instance, would wives be called to submit to their husbands (Eph 5:22)? Because, being "equal" does not make us the "same." There are obvious and significant differences between men and women, which only begin with anatomy. No one would look at a hammer and a nail and imply any inequality. Certainly, they are not the same thing, but what can one do apart from the other?
I almost hesitate to say it, but there is some truth to that same principle when it comes to races. You know, I have to tan in the sun if I don't want to look sickly, because I am as pale white as they come. Does that mean I am less valuable to the Lord than a latin or black man? Of course not: that would be absurd. Does God love me any less because I can never become pregnant? Does he love my wife less because she can never make herself pregnant?
You see how silly it is to try and sell someone on the argument that we are all the "same" in the eyes of the Lord. Make no mistake, however, because we most certainly are all EQUAL in the eyes of the Lord. We all have an equal inheritance with the Lord, provided we choose to accept it.
I specifically want to discuss racism, which from the passage above is clearly against God's design. Without taking one kernel of truth away from that statement, it is important to remember that differences are also a part of God's design. If we are true to that, then we must accept those differences and realize that they do not make us more or less equal. They are just a part of God's plan.
So why, if we are all equal, do so many people hate others based on their race, culture, or gender? To put it simply, some people are stupid. Notice that I did not say ignorant? I don't buy, in the world we live in, that people cannot figure out that this sort of hatred is wrong. They know it, but they are just too stupid to care. They cannot live with those differences alluded to earlier. Mankind quickly learned from the example of the snake in Genesis, that which is different can kill you quickly, cause you to fall. Still, to assume this is true of everything and everyone different, is stupid.
So how do you confront such stupidity? I do not claim to have the answers, but I can tell you one thing: if you try to blow out a fire, you may just make it worse. Eventually, a fire will burn out on its own, when it has expended all its fuel. If you blow on it, though, you are just providing the oxygen it needs to survive. Better to smother a fire than to blow it out.
Racism is like a fire of hatred that needs desperately to be smothered. Giving attention to a racist is much like blowing on a fire. They thrive on the conflict, and when they see organizations and people fighting so hard against them, then they feel justified in their efforts and beliefs. Racism, and similar forms of hatred are perpetuated in the same way as violence in the middle east. Every attack provokes a reaction, and each reaction makes the opposing side feel that it has struck a chord, landed a major blow, and gained publicity for its cause. Similarly, fighting the racist does nothing to change matters. If you cannot change the heart, then the racist will forever remain a racist. It is engrained deeply in his faulty world view. You cannot convince a man to abandon his hatred through reason. Rather, you have to find a way to introduce love to counter the hatred.
People in this world who cling to and spread hate want a public forum. I believe they want publicity, even if it is bad publicity, so that they can spread their hate-mongering to others. This is true: hate, like fire, spreads fast. As those living in California realize, it's often hard to find enough water fast enough to stop a spreading fire in the forest. Similarly, it is difficult to find enough love fast enough to stop the spread of hatred.
I have learned that there are substantial differences between human races, but we are all still human, are we not? Often, those differences are sensitive topics, and so they are ignored. Other times, those differences are given more attentiaion than they deserve. Personally, I find the notion of hate crime legislation, for instance, to be particularly ludicrous. After all, a crime against a person is a crime. To commit that crime, a person was motivated by hate or, at a minimum, indifference. Whether that hate/indifference was motivated by racism makes little difference. In the end, the result is the same: a perpetrator and a victim.
To segregate perpetrators (treat them separately, differently from other perpetrators) based upon their racial motivations, inevitably ends up segregating the victims too: if Joe attacks Alice for being black and Sue, who is Asian, for no reason, and if Joe then receives a greater punishment for attacking Alice, then Sue has been treated differently because of her race. See how it spreads so easily? What did Sue do to deserve this forced segregation? She was, after all, just as much a victim as Alice, was she not?
By treating our hypothetical perpetrators and victims differently, we have forcibly segregated them all. In doing so, we have stooped to the level of our hypothetical perpetrator Joe: treating people differently based upon the colour of their skin.
The solution to racism, sexism, prejudice, and other hatred is beyond my ability to craft. Thankfully, it is not beyond God's. What I can tell you is this: adopting the methodology of the haters is not the solution. We, as Christians, cannot afford to support legislation and public policies that elevate one type of human being over another. That is simply wrong.
I have not forgotten my earlier point: there are differences between people who are, nevertheless, equal in the eyes of the Lord our God. So, why do these differences not require different treatment in laws and policies? Because that would deprive them of their right to equal treatment under the law.
Whether it is affirmative action legislation that affords minorities increased access to jobs over other races, or whether its segregation laws that send a minority race to the back of the bus, different restaraunts, and different stores, we cannot afford to start commanding different treatment of races by law. Ex-Prime Minister of England, Tony Blair, once commented that statistical research showed most violent knife crimes in London were being committed by black youths. Should a law have been passed, then, to impose a curfew on black youths only?
Certainly not. It does not matter whether this method would be effective either: the objection is that we Christians have a duty to fight against inequality. Christ encouraged his disciples to accept the Gentiles in addition to the Jews and to afford them the same rights. I disagree with any legislation targeting a specific race to exact a cost or to confer a benefit. The ends never justify the means.
Rather, the Church needs to lobby for a government that supports equal rights (that's right - I am implying tha the Church should get involved in politics - another blog, another day folks). The differences between race and gender are not something that can be micro-managed by the government. The government should make rules that all must abide by.
The first amendment ensures freedom of religion and expression for a reason: government is not able to play "morality police." Sure, sometimes it tries, but the government cannot fix social issues such like racism with the stroke of a pen. Society, and the Church in particular, must accept responsibility and attend to them. Dealing with differences between race, gender, and culture is something that people must sort out for themselves. The government's duty is to achieve a safe enviornment for human beings, as a people, to interact and work through their differences. Elected officials cannot legislative love and acceptance.
The Church, however, can preach it, teach it, and live by it. We believers can spread love and equality by sharing the gospel. The truth is, no born again believer can legitimately read the Bible to promote racism. As the gospel spreads, and as believers embrace the truth of which Christ testified, hatred must die. No person can both truly accept Christ and also hate men because of their race. That would be an untenable contradiction.
So, it is time to stop introducing race into politics and government, where there is no hope of victory/success. Rather, it must be attacked at its source: hatred. You cannot change the mind of a racist by arguing with him that he is wrong. Instead, show him the Word of God. Share with him the love of Christ, and that CAN transform him.
More than once I have wandered into the "wrong" part of town. Men with dark faces stare at me, on a public street, as though I were a trespasser. The white colour of my skin makes me unwelcome in certain places. Those same people who stare at me with hatred, however, will likely find that the colour of their skin makes them unwelcome in places where mine is accepted.
Would it solve this problem to pass a law that says all races may use any public street in any neighborhood? Newsflash: the law already says that. So how do we fix it? Well, I don't believe I have ever been stared down by someone of another race, out of hatred, in church on Sunday morning. The reason? It does not synch with true Christian beliefs.
So, obviously, we need to get those beliefs out of the church building into the world where all this hate lives and breathes. Talking about racism does nothing to solve it. Talking about hate does nothing to solve it. Walking in love, sharing the gospel, and reaching out to lost souls, however, does.
Was there no racism or sexism in the world Paul lived in at the time he wrote the scripture above? Of course there was. If memory serves, and I could be mistaken, then Galatians was written contemporaneously with Caligula's rule of the Roman Empire, which was famous for making slaves of men of all races. Slaves were also forced to risk their lives as both gladiators and prostitutes in Rome to increase the girth of their masters' purses. So what did Paul mean?
"You are all one in Christ Jesus" was a deliberate departure from a world filled with slavery and prejudice. Remember, "The greatest among you shall be your servant. Whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted" (Matthew 23:11-12).
So, it is clear from scripture that, insofar as God is concerned, we are all equal. So why, for instance, would wives be called to submit to their husbands (Eph 5:22)? Because, being "equal" does not make us the "same." There are obvious and significant differences between men and women, which only begin with anatomy. No one would look at a hammer and a nail and imply any inequality. Certainly, they are not the same thing, but what can one do apart from the other?
I almost hesitate to say it, but there is some truth to that same principle when it comes to races. You know, I have to tan in the sun if I don't want to look sickly, because I am as pale white as they come. Does that mean I am less valuable to the Lord than a latin or black man? Of course not: that would be absurd. Does God love me any less because I can never become pregnant? Does he love my wife less because she can never make herself pregnant?
You see how silly it is to try and sell someone on the argument that we are all the "same" in the eyes of the Lord. Make no mistake, however, because we most certainly are all EQUAL in the eyes of the Lord. We all have an equal inheritance with the Lord, provided we choose to accept it.
I specifically want to discuss racism, which from the passage above is clearly against God's design. Without taking one kernel of truth away from that statement, it is important to remember that differences are also a part of God's design. If we are true to that, then we must accept those differences and realize that they do not make us more or less equal. They are just a part of God's plan.
So why, if we are all equal, do so many people hate others based on their race, culture, or gender? To put it simply, some people are stupid. Notice that I did not say ignorant? I don't buy, in the world we live in, that people cannot figure out that this sort of hatred is wrong. They know it, but they are just too stupid to care. They cannot live with those differences alluded to earlier. Mankind quickly learned from the example of the snake in Genesis, that which is different can kill you quickly, cause you to fall. Still, to assume this is true of everything and everyone different, is stupid.
So how do you confront such stupidity? I do not claim to have the answers, but I can tell you one thing: if you try to blow out a fire, you may just make it worse. Eventually, a fire will burn out on its own, when it has expended all its fuel. If you blow on it, though, you are just providing the oxygen it needs to survive. Better to smother a fire than to blow it out.
Racism is like a fire of hatred that needs desperately to be smothered. Giving attention to a racist is much like blowing on a fire. They thrive on the conflict, and when they see organizations and people fighting so hard against them, then they feel justified in their efforts and beliefs. Racism, and similar forms of hatred are perpetuated in the same way as violence in the middle east. Every attack provokes a reaction, and each reaction makes the opposing side feel that it has struck a chord, landed a major blow, and gained publicity for its cause. Similarly, fighting the racist does nothing to change matters. If you cannot change the heart, then the racist will forever remain a racist. It is engrained deeply in his faulty world view. You cannot convince a man to abandon his hatred through reason. Rather, you have to find a way to introduce love to counter the hatred.
People in this world who cling to and spread hate want a public forum. I believe they want publicity, even if it is bad publicity, so that they can spread their hate-mongering to others. This is true: hate, like fire, spreads fast. As those living in California realize, it's often hard to find enough water fast enough to stop a spreading fire in the forest. Similarly, it is difficult to find enough love fast enough to stop the spread of hatred.
I have learned that there are substantial differences between human races, but we are all still human, are we not? Often, those differences are sensitive topics, and so they are ignored. Other times, those differences are given more attentiaion than they deserve. Personally, I find the notion of hate crime legislation, for instance, to be particularly ludicrous. After all, a crime against a person is a crime. To commit that crime, a person was motivated by hate or, at a minimum, indifference. Whether that hate/indifference was motivated by racism makes little difference. In the end, the result is the same: a perpetrator and a victim.
To segregate perpetrators (treat them separately, differently from other perpetrators) based upon their racial motivations, inevitably ends up segregating the victims too: if Joe attacks Alice for being black and Sue, who is Asian, for no reason, and if Joe then receives a greater punishment for attacking Alice, then Sue has been treated differently because of her race. See how it spreads so easily? What did Sue do to deserve this forced segregation? She was, after all, just as much a victim as Alice, was she not?
By treating our hypothetical perpetrators and victims differently, we have forcibly segregated them all. In doing so, we have stooped to the level of our hypothetical perpetrator Joe: treating people differently based upon the colour of their skin.
The solution to racism, sexism, prejudice, and other hatred is beyond my ability to craft. Thankfully, it is not beyond God's. What I can tell you is this: adopting the methodology of the haters is not the solution. We, as Christians, cannot afford to support legislation and public policies that elevate one type of human being over another. That is simply wrong.
I have not forgotten my earlier point: there are differences between people who are, nevertheless, equal in the eyes of the Lord our God. So, why do these differences not require different treatment in laws and policies? Because that would deprive them of their right to equal treatment under the law.
Whether it is affirmative action legislation that affords minorities increased access to jobs over other races, or whether its segregation laws that send a minority race to the back of the bus, different restaraunts, and different stores, we cannot afford to start commanding different treatment of races by law. Ex-Prime Minister of England, Tony Blair, once commented that statistical research showed most violent knife crimes in London were being committed by black youths. Should a law have been passed, then, to impose a curfew on black youths only?
Certainly not. It does not matter whether this method would be effective either: the objection is that we Christians have a duty to fight against inequality. Christ encouraged his disciples to accept the Gentiles in addition to the Jews and to afford them the same rights. I disagree with any legislation targeting a specific race to exact a cost or to confer a benefit. The ends never justify the means.
Rather, the Church needs to lobby for a government that supports equal rights (that's right - I am implying tha the Church should get involved in politics - another blog, another day folks). The differences between race and gender are not something that can be micro-managed by the government. The government should make rules that all must abide by.
The first amendment ensures freedom of religion and expression for a reason: government is not able to play "morality police." Sure, sometimes it tries, but the government cannot fix social issues such like racism with the stroke of a pen. Society, and the Church in particular, must accept responsibility and attend to them. Dealing with differences between race, gender, and culture is something that people must sort out for themselves. The government's duty is to achieve a safe enviornment for human beings, as a people, to interact and work through their differences. Elected officials cannot legislative love and acceptance.
The Church, however, can preach it, teach it, and live by it. We believers can spread love and equality by sharing the gospel. The truth is, no born again believer can legitimately read the Bible to promote racism. As the gospel spreads, and as believers embrace the truth of which Christ testified, hatred must die. No person can both truly accept Christ and also hate men because of their race. That would be an untenable contradiction.
So, it is time to stop introducing race into politics and government, where there is no hope of victory/success. Rather, it must be attacked at its source: hatred. You cannot change the mind of a racist by arguing with him that he is wrong. Instead, show him the Word of God. Share with him the love of Christ, and that CAN transform him.
More than once I have wandered into the "wrong" part of town. Men with dark faces stare at me, on a public street, as though I were a trespasser. The white colour of my skin makes me unwelcome in certain places. Those same people who stare at me with hatred, however, will likely find that the colour of their skin makes them unwelcome in places where mine is accepted.
Would it solve this problem to pass a law that says all races may use any public street in any neighborhood? Newsflash: the law already says that. So how do we fix it? Well, I don't believe I have ever been stared down by someone of another race, out of hatred, in church on Sunday morning. The reason? It does not synch with true Christian beliefs.
So, obviously, we need to get those beliefs out of the church building into the world where all this hate lives and breathes. Talking about racism does nothing to solve it. Talking about hate does nothing to solve it. Walking in love, sharing the gospel, and reaching out to lost souls, however, does.
Truth and "religion": remembering those in need.
"Religion that is pure and undefiled before God, the Father, is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world" (James 1:27) (emphasis supplied). "Whoever is generous to the poor lends to the LORD, and he will repay him for his deed" (Proverbs 19:17) (emphasis supplied). "The greatest among you shall be your servant. Whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted" (Matthew 23:11-12). "Learn to do good; seek justice, correct oppression; bring justice to the fatherless, plead the widow’s cause" (Isaiah 1:17).
This blog entry has a very simple point: Christian "religion" is about looking after the poor and afflicted. It's about serving one another rather than seeking to be served. We believers are called to submit to one another in reverence for Christ (reference Ephesians 5:21-22). I encourage all of you to think on what it means to "submit." It means, primarily, to subject yourself, in deference, to the authority and judgment of another. We Christians are also called to have a servant's heart.
The stark reality is this: if you are not looking after the poor and afflicted, then you are not practicing true Christian religion. It is so popular in churches today to talk about the word "religion" as though it were a bad/negative thing. It's trendy for Christians to say, "I am not about being 'religious.'" That's a shame, though. If we were being religious as the Bible defines it, then we'd be doing a lot of good and fulfilling God's purpose. I realize that, today, we have allowed the word "religion" to come to mean other things: unbiblical ceremonies and rituals, mindless worship, and the practice of "going through the motions" in church.
I agree with the principal of choosing to practice genuine worship and faith rather than standing on ceremony and/or practicing mindless worship that is neither good for our spirit or concerned with truly praising/exalting the Lord, but true religion glorifies the Lord. The Church has allowed the word "religion" to become something other than what the Lord intended and defined.
Remember, this entire blog, and all its entries, are about God's truth applied to subjects of interest to me. Here is the truth applied: practice genuine religion, in the way Lord defines it. The Word defines religion in James 1:27, which I have quoted above in the ESV for all to read.
The Church, as of late, is doing a lot of what I call "selling out." We play the semantics game as an evangelical tactic. We find non-believers have a bad impression of the word "religion." In response, rather than attempting to explain what true religion is for Christians, we start preaching that "religion" IS, in fact, a bad thing and that Christians are not religious. A book called "unChristian" (http://www.unchristian.com/) reveals some startling facts about how non-believers views Christians, derived from a lot of painstaking statistical research. However well-intended, this book encourages the Church to "sell out" by encouraging Christians to focus less on the things that turn non-believers away (our views on politics, religion, and modern culture) in order to share the message of salvation. The Church as a whole is doing this: using word games and semantical points to shift the focus away from the parts of Christianity that turn non-believers off in order to share the gospel with them.
This will confuse most non-believers, and it is obviously not what the Bible teaches us to do, and the ends do not justify the means. I also do not believe that avoiding the truth will advance the great commission (for reasons, check out the "Truth Project" at http://www.thetruthproject.org/).
So, to the Church (which is comprised of people, not buildings), I urge you all to stop telling people you are not religious. Stop playing word games: when someone tells you that s/he hates religion or doesn't understand it, then be sure to tell them what true religion is! Who would say that helping the poor/afflicted and being a servant to others is a bad thing?
Our faith is in Christ and God the Father, and we ought to use the Holy Spirit the Lord has given us as power to practice our true religion: reaching out to the needy, impoverished, and afflicted. Not all afflictions are physical or financial, and many if not most are spiritual, and we must follow the great commission, bringing Christ to the world. That does not, however, end our obligation to help those who are physically and financially needy.
So often, I hear people give excuses for not giving to the needy/poor: "I can't afford it right now," and "I don't trust them to use the money for anything other than liquor," are two very common excuses.
To the first complaint, I say that I am still paying for law school and always seem to have a slew of bills to pay, but notice what the Lord said in Proverbs 19:12 (see above): the Lord considers helping the poor to be a loan, and He will reward you. I do not believe this to be a false promise. I am not a pusher of the so-called "health, wealth, and prosperity" doctrine so popular with Kenneth Copeland and Creflo Dollar. However, I do believe that God is our provider who knows our needs. Matthew 6:25-34 teaches us that God knows all our needs, and we should not worry about them. Instead, we are to stop worrying, seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and our needs will be met!
How do we seek God's righteousness? I think, to start, it would be a good idea to practice religion as He defines it. So, do not let your financial concerns prevent you from helping those less fortunate than you. Give what you feel led to give, share what you feel led to share, and tell the downtrodden about a Lord who meets needs. Did it ever occur to you, my many readers, that God meets needs by using His followers? Did it occur to you that, logically, this is why real religion is about serving others?
If money is so tight that there is nothing there for you to give, then give what you can: your time and service. Visit a nursing home and spend time with some widows. Ever think about how many people in this world have no family to share meals or even holidays with? How many of these people do not have a church family, or, worse still, have no faith?
To the second complaint about giving, that the needy may use what you give to buy alcohol or misuse it in some other way, I suggest that you research organizations like Compassion (see http://www.compassion.com/) and Food for the Poor (see http://www.foodforthepoor.org/). They won't buy alcohol for those they support. They use your donations to provide food and shelter.
Now, here's the hard part: don't let others see you do this. Matthew 6 is such a great chapter for those wanting to understand true religion. In Matthew 6:1-4, Christ teaches us the following:
"'Beware of practicing your righteousness before other people in order to be seen by them, for then you will have no reward from your Father who is in heaven. Thus, when you give to the needy, sound no trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may be praised by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward. But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your giving may be in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will reward you.'"
True religion, if you understand nothing else about it, is all about being a true servant. This means that you must serve for the sake of serving, not to gain favor with the world or to profit from it. That does not mean you cannot expect God to reward you. It means that you need to practice true religion with a desire to receive your reward from the Lord rather than the world. If you seek you reward from men, then that is all the reward you will receive. Instead, as you are providing for the needs of others, train your eyes on the Lord who is your provider. I believe the Lord will reward us in Heaven, but I also believe, from the scriptures I have cited, that we will be rewarded here on earth. Debts will be paid, and bills will be met. The Lord knows your needs AND your desires. Trust Him with both, and stop worrying about what this world thinks of you. Focus on what the Lord thinks, and you will not be disappointed.
And please, please, stop telling people that "religion" is a bad thing. That is a distortion of God's truth, which serves Satan's purpose, not the Lord's. When people ask you about religion, show them what is really is and what it really means.
God bless you all as you are a blessing to others!
This blog entry has a very simple point: Christian "religion" is about looking after the poor and afflicted. It's about serving one another rather than seeking to be served. We believers are called to submit to one another in reverence for Christ (reference Ephesians 5:21-22). I encourage all of you to think on what it means to "submit." It means, primarily, to subject yourself, in deference, to the authority and judgment of another. We Christians are also called to have a servant's heart.
The stark reality is this: if you are not looking after the poor and afflicted, then you are not practicing true Christian religion. It is so popular in churches today to talk about the word "religion" as though it were a bad/negative thing. It's trendy for Christians to say, "I am not about being 'religious.'" That's a shame, though. If we were being religious as the Bible defines it, then we'd be doing a lot of good and fulfilling God's purpose. I realize that, today, we have allowed the word "religion" to come to mean other things: unbiblical ceremonies and rituals, mindless worship, and the practice of "going through the motions" in church.
I agree with the principal of choosing to practice genuine worship and faith rather than standing on ceremony and/or practicing mindless worship that is neither good for our spirit or concerned with truly praising/exalting the Lord, but true religion glorifies the Lord. The Church has allowed the word "religion" to become something other than what the Lord intended and defined.
Remember, this entire blog, and all its entries, are about God's truth applied to subjects of interest to me. Here is the truth applied: practice genuine religion, in the way Lord defines it. The Word defines religion in James 1:27, which I have quoted above in the ESV for all to read.
The Church, as of late, is doing a lot of what I call "selling out." We play the semantics game as an evangelical tactic. We find non-believers have a bad impression of the word "religion." In response, rather than attempting to explain what true religion is for Christians, we start preaching that "religion" IS, in fact, a bad thing and that Christians are not religious. A book called "unChristian" (http://www.unchristian.com/) reveals some startling facts about how non-believers views Christians, derived from a lot of painstaking statistical research. However well-intended, this book encourages the Church to "sell out" by encouraging Christians to focus less on the things that turn non-believers away (our views on politics, religion, and modern culture) in order to share the message of salvation. The Church as a whole is doing this: using word games and semantical points to shift the focus away from the parts of Christianity that turn non-believers off in order to share the gospel with them.
This will confuse most non-believers, and it is obviously not what the Bible teaches us to do, and the ends do not justify the means. I also do not believe that avoiding the truth will advance the great commission (for reasons, check out the "Truth Project" at http://www.thetruthproject.org/).
So, to the Church (which is comprised of people, not buildings), I urge you all to stop telling people you are not religious. Stop playing word games: when someone tells you that s/he hates religion or doesn't understand it, then be sure to tell them what true religion is! Who would say that helping the poor/afflicted and being a servant to others is a bad thing?
Our faith is in Christ and God the Father, and we ought to use the Holy Spirit the Lord has given us as power to practice our true religion: reaching out to the needy, impoverished, and afflicted. Not all afflictions are physical or financial, and many if not most are spiritual, and we must follow the great commission, bringing Christ to the world. That does not, however, end our obligation to help those who are physically and financially needy.
So often, I hear people give excuses for not giving to the needy/poor: "I can't afford it right now," and "I don't trust them to use the money for anything other than liquor," are two very common excuses.
To the first complaint, I say that I am still paying for law school and always seem to have a slew of bills to pay, but notice what the Lord said in Proverbs 19:12 (see above): the Lord considers helping the poor to be a loan, and He will reward you. I do not believe this to be a false promise. I am not a pusher of the so-called "health, wealth, and prosperity" doctrine so popular with Kenneth Copeland and Creflo Dollar. However, I do believe that God is our provider who knows our needs. Matthew 6:25-34 teaches us that God knows all our needs, and we should not worry about them. Instead, we are to stop worrying, seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and our needs will be met!
How do we seek God's righteousness? I think, to start, it would be a good idea to practice religion as He defines it. So, do not let your financial concerns prevent you from helping those less fortunate than you. Give what you feel led to give, share what you feel led to share, and tell the downtrodden about a Lord who meets needs. Did it ever occur to you, my many readers, that God meets needs by using His followers? Did it occur to you that, logically, this is why real religion is about serving others?
If money is so tight that there is nothing there for you to give, then give what you can: your time and service. Visit a nursing home and spend time with some widows. Ever think about how many people in this world have no family to share meals or even holidays with? How many of these people do not have a church family, or, worse still, have no faith?
To the second complaint about giving, that the needy may use what you give to buy alcohol or misuse it in some other way, I suggest that you research organizations like Compassion (see http://www.compassion.com/) and Food for the Poor (see http://www.foodforthepoor.org/). They won't buy alcohol for those they support. They use your donations to provide food and shelter.
Now, here's the hard part: don't let others see you do this. Matthew 6 is such a great chapter for those wanting to understand true religion. In Matthew 6:1-4, Christ teaches us the following:
"'Beware of practicing your righteousness before other people in order to be seen by them, for then you will have no reward from your Father who is in heaven. Thus, when you give to the needy, sound no trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may be praised by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward. But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your giving may be in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will reward you.'"
True religion, if you understand nothing else about it, is all about being a true servant. This means that you must serve for the sake of serving, not to gain favor with the world or to profit from it. That does not mean you cannot expect God to reward you. It means that you need to practice true religion with a desire to receive your reward from the Lord rather than the world. If you seek you reward from men, then that is all the reward you will receive. Instead, as you are providing for the needs of others, train your eyes on the Lord who is your provider. I believe the Lord will reward us in Heaven, but I also believe, from the scriptures I have cited, that we will be rewarded here on earth. Debts will be paid, and bills will be met. The Lord knows your needs AND your desires. Trust Him with both, and stop worrying about what this world thinks of you. Focus on what the Lord thinks, and you will not be disappointed.
And please, please, stop telling people that "religion" is a bad thing. That is a distortion of God's truth, which serves Satan's purpose, not the Lord's. When people ask you about religion, show them what is really is and what it really means.
God bless you all as you are a blessing to others!
Friday, January 2, 2009
And so it begins, with naught but a word of encouragement from my wife.
If something is worth doing, then it is worth doing well, or so my grandfather believed. I've learned a lot of things about a variety of topics from a lot of people: parents, grandparents, friends, loved ones, professors and paupers. I'd like to think that my greatest teacher has been the Lord, though I realize that I should spend far more time picking His brain.
Encouragement, however, is something that I have learned from three people: first, my mother encouraged me to like and appreciate myself, to have confidence and self-respect; second, my father encouraged me to believe that nothing is beyond my grasp if I work for it; and, third, my wife has encouraged me to take the first step.
My hope is that, one day, looking back on my life, people will care to ask me why, after so many abandoned attempts, I finally decided to write. Maybe, if I am blessed, they will ask what inspired me to do so. When that day comes, I will tell them that:
"It began, with naught but a word of encouragement from my wife, who convinced me that there were people out there who wanted to read the things I had to write."
No one subject compels or interest me above all others, and I find it hard to believe that people want to read what I might write about, but I try to take seriously the things my wife says. More so than myself, Stephanie has a feeling for what "normal" people do and think. Not being even remotely normal myself, I appreciate having her as a compass to point me in the correct direction. Personally, I think it is wisest to write about things that interest you, so that is what I intend to do until someone has a better idea.
Therefore, I intend to write about truth, religion, politics, law, relationships, dating, and marriage. If those subjects don't seem interrelated to you, my many prospective readers, then you probably do need to read some of the things I intend to write.
As an attorney, it could be said that I get paid to give advice. While I may write blogs that contain advice, any advice given cannot be taken as legal advice. If you want quality advice or counsel, you need to see an attorney in real life and let him/her advise you with the benefit of all the information you can give him/her (lies an omissions only hurt the advice-seeker, not the advisor). Nothing written on this site is intended as legal advice nor should it be relied upon as such. There is no attorney-client relationship between the author of this blog and any reader unless the author agrees, in writing, to such enter into such a relationship. Thanks.
Now that the disclaimer has been given, I will feel silly if no one reads my blog, but my wife believes someone will. And I trust my wife.
Encouragement, however, is something that I have learned from three people: first, my mother encouraged me to like and appreciate myself, to have confidence and self-respect; second, my father encouraged me to believe that nothing is beyond my grasp if I work for it; and, third, my wife has encouraged me to take the first step.
My hope is that, one day, looking back on my life, people will care to ask me why, after so many abandoned attempts, I finally decided to write. Maybe, if I am blessed, they will ask what inspired me to do so. When that day comes, I will tell them that:
"It began, with naught but a word of encouragement from my wife, who convinced me that there were people out there who wanted to read the things I had to write."
No one subject compels or interest me above all others, and I find it hard to believe that people want to read what I might write about, but I try to take seriously the things my wife says. More so than myself, Stephanie has a feeling for what "normal" people do and think. Not being even remotely normal myself, I appreciate having her as a compass to point me in the correct direction. Personally, I think it is wisest to write about things that interest you, so that is what I intend to do until someone has a better idea.
Therefore, I intend to write about truth, religion, politics, law, relationships, dating, and marriage. If those subjects don't seem interrelated to you, my many prospective readers, then you probably do need to read some of the things I intend to write.
As an attorney, it could be said that I get paid to give advice. While I may write blogs that contain advice, any advice given cannot be taken as legal advice. If you want quality advice or counsel, you need to see an attorney in real life and let him/her advise you with the benefit of all the information you can give him/her (lies an omissions only hurt the advice-seeker, not the advisor). Nothing written on this site is intended as legal advice nor should it be relied upon as such. There is no attorney-client relationship between the author of this blog and any reader unless the author agrees, in writing, to such enter into such a relationship. Thanks.
Now that the disclaimer has been given, I will feel silly if no one reads my blog, but my wife believes someone will. And I trust my wife.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)